Rule 46A compliance required when additional evidence is used; matter restored for fresh assessment after AO review.

Admission and reliance on additional evidence in first appeal without forwarding it to the Assessing Officer violated Rule 46A, particularly where the assessment had been completed ex parte under section 144. The remand process was ineffective because the Assessing Officer was not given the financial statements and bank ledger for comment, so appellate relief based on that material could not be sustained. The matter was therefore restored for fresh assessment, with the Assessing Officer to examine the evidence and afford reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting and relying upon additional evidence without forwarding it to the Assessing Officer, and whether the matter required restoration for denovo assessment.

Analysis: The assessment had been completed ex parte under section 144. In the first appellate proceedings, the assessee produced additional evidence, but the documents were not sent to the Assessing Officer when remand was sought. The remand report stated that, in the absence of the financial statements and bank ledger, no could be offered on those materials. This omission amounted to a violation of Rule 46A. The cited decision was found distinguishable on the facts. In these circumstances, the appellate relief could not be sustained and the matter required fresh examination by the Assessing Officer after considering the evidence and granting opportunity of hearing.

Conclusion: The issue is decided against the assessee and the matter is restored to the Assessing Officer for denovo assessment after due consideration of the evidence and after affording reasonable opportunity.

---